INDIA POST

PHILATELIC AWARDS SYSTEM (IP-PAS)

Chapter 1
GENERAL RULES FOR THE ASSESSMENT OF PHILATELIC EXHIBITS (GRAPEs)

Preliminary
Philately is both a leisure time activity and a wholesome vocation, and exhibitions are its
public face. Needless to say, exhibitors are to be encouraged rather than discouraged.
Jurors should be friendly and helpful towards the exhibitors and refrain from adopting a
holier than thou attitude. The Juror should find and emphasize elements to encourage and to
guide the exhibitor on to the next step. This is particularly important in cases where the
exhibits show effort, merit, and possibility of development.

Awards are given to the exhibit and not to the exhibitor. Assessment is limited solely to the
material in the frames and Jurors are not judging the owners, the previous owners, the
circumstances of acquisition, or any rumor concerning the exhibit. Enforcing rules
concerning these or any other legal and moral matter must be of no concern to the Jurors; it
is up to the Exhibition management (represented by the Steering Committee) to look into
such issues.

Article 1 Competitive Exhibitions

1.1 The principles defined in the following Rules are applicable to all competitive classes at
exhibitions organized under the Patronage, Recognition or Support of India Post. They are
intended to serve the Jury as regulations and as a guide to the collector for the development
of the exhibits.

1.2 The general principles stated in these Rules are sensibly extended by the Guidelines for
each competitive class contained in Chapter 2 of IP-PAs. The Guidelines intend to provide
general guidance regarding the definition and nature of the appropriate material; the
principles of exhibit composition, and the judging criteria of exhibits, to a particular class and
should be read in conjunction with these Rules.

1.3 These Rules and the Guidelines are not expected, neither intended to provide an answer
to every possible question; nevertheless these will help the jury and the exhibitor to better
understand the system for philatelic awards.

1.4 These Rules and the Guidelines should suitably be modified to comply with the
conditions for National, Zonal, Regional, and District level philatelic exhibitions. The level of
the exhibition affects how stringently the exhibit is evaluated. A high degree of flexibility and
liberality is advisable in the case of District I Regional exhibitions.

Article 2 Competitive Exhibits

2.1 The limit of the frame space allocated at exhibitions may not normally allow a collector to
display an entire collection. Therefore, the collector must select suitable material, which will
ensure continuity and understanding of the subject and explain relevant aspects of
knowledge and condition.

2.2 An exhibit should have a clear beginning, a central theme, and a logical ending.

2.3 The scope of an exhibit in the respective classes is defined in the Guidelines.

2.4 If an exhibit is transferred, moved out-of-competition, penalized, or not judged, the

exhibition management should notify the reason/s to concerned exhibitor as considered by
the jury.

Article 3 Principles of Exhibit Composition

3.1 The exhibit shall consist solely of relevant items, supporting documentation and text.
Relevant items are defined for each class in the Guidelines for that class.

3.2 The exhibit shall clearly show its leading idea, developed logically and in a balanced
manner according to the characteristics of the respective competitive class, as defined by
the Guidelines for that class.

3.3 The title must describe the contents of the exhibit. The concept, that may take any form,
shall be laid out in an introductory statement. The title and the concept form a whole in
perfect concordance with the material shown. The material displayed should be fully
consistent with the subject chosen. The selection should show the appreciation of the
exhibitor as to what is available in the context of chosen subject. It should help the public
and judges to appreciate the significance of the key items on display. Exhibits of material
that may be regarded as less well known or obscure should make full use of the introductory
statement. It should also include the fullest range of relevant philatelic material of the highest
available quality.

3.4 The display must begin with an introductory page in which the exhibitor defines in full
what the subject is, explains how it will be developed, and specifies what the self-imposed
limits are. The concept or plan should also be used to provide relevant general information
on the subject. It may also include a short list of the important documentary sources used. It
must be subdivided in chapters. A mere list of contents is not enough for a plan. A well
thought out plan may avoid otherwise lengthy descriptions later in the exhibit. The judges will
use this information to evaluate the material shown in relation to the aims set forth by the
exhibitor. Another introductory page may be desirable in certain subjects or classes and for
exhibits of eight frames.

3.5 The presentation and the accompanying text of the exhibit should be simple, tasteful and
well balanced. It should add information to that provided by the material and show the level
of understanding of the subject and the personal research of the exhibitor.

3.6 Repaired items are to be mentioned in the description. However any attempt to improve
the appearance of a postal marking, subsequent to its being applied by the postal
authorities, shall be treated as being faked material.

3.7 If the status or genuineness of any item is in doubt, but the item is considered significant
enough to be included in the exhibit, it may be included, but its status should be indicated by
explanatory remarks. The presence of faked, forged or repaired material that is not clearly
described as such will cause the downgrading of an exhibit by at least a medal level. The
exhibitors are advised to have their items verified in doubtful cases.

3.8 Illustrations of relevant postal markings are necessary only when the originals are not
clear enough to the observer. When it is desirable to illustrate significant markings on the
reverse side of a cover, they may either be drawn or iIIustrated with a reproduction
(photograph or photocopy), but a reproduction should be apparent as such to the observer.
Colour photocopies or photographs should be at least 25%’ different in size from the original.

3.9 Classified or restricted items, the display or exhibition of which are prohibited under the
rules and regulations of India Post, should not form part of the exhibit~. The Jury will report
the presence of such material to the Exhibition Management for suitable action, which could
even involve legal procedures.
Article 4 Criteria for Evaluation
4.1 The approved specialists in their respective field who are duly appointed as member of
the Jury in accordance with ’Philatelic Jurors Program’ shall carry out the evaluation of the
exhibits.

4.2 Each exhibit will have to be evaluated on its own merits. The evaluation of exhibits will
only take into consideration the material and information displayed.

4.3 Criteria for the evaluation of competitive exhibits are (1) Treatment, (2) philatelic and
related Knowledge, (3) Personal Study and Research, (4) Condition and Rarity of material
exhibited, and (5) Presentation. These criteria are valid for all types of exhibits.

4.4 The Exhibits will be evaluated by allocating marks for each of the criteria~. These will ’be
entered on evaluation sheets of an approved format. A sample Mark sheet is given JIS
Annex to IP-PAs.

4.5 To get a consistent evaluation, the Jury will enter for each exhibitor a short critical
evaluation, their observations and some advice to improve the exhibit to the exhibitor.

4.6 The basic elements underlying each individual criterion suitably modified to comply with
the particular requirements for each class are defined in the Guidelines for that class.

4. 7 The Jury and the exhibitors must have a clear understanding of the need to consider
carefully the various aspects that combine together to maximize the award an exhibit can
attract.

4.8 The criterion of "Treatment" requires an evaluation of the degree of advancement,

"originality, completeness and correctness of the selected material. Does the exhibit show
the greatest degree of advancement in terms of the material exhibited? Is the approach
orthodox, or has an unusual or original interpretation been used? How complete is the
treatment of the subject chosen? Has the SUbject been chosen to enable a properly
balanced exhibit to be shown in the space available? Does the material exhibited properly
correspond with the title and plan of the exhibit? Exhibitors should ensure that the exhibit is
cohesive and avoid combining largely unrelated subjects; such exhibits are likely to lose
marks under this criterion. The judges should also assess whether the material exhibited is
relevant to the scope of the exhibit.

4.9 The exhibitor may omit material that is of lesser significance. In general, a token showing
may represent the common material required to complete the story, while the better material
should be shown in depth. The key material of accepted difficulty and desirability should be
present in the selected subject. The judges will appreciate that this treatment shows the
exhibitor’s knowledge of the material.

4.10 The proper evaluation of philatelic and related knowledge, personal study, and
research will be based on the relevant description of each philatelic object shown. The items
chosen for display and their related description demonstrate philatelic and related
knowledge. The information given should not overwhelm the philatelic material shown. The
’Knowledge’ criterion applies differently to each type of exhibit. For example, philatelic
knowledge for Traditional exhibits, postal history knowledge for Postal History exhibits, and
philatelic and thematic knowledge for thematic exhibit.

4.11 Personal study is demonstrated by the proper analysis of the items chosen for display.
For exhibits where original research (presentation of new facts related to the chosen subject)
is evident, a large proportion of the total points may be given for it. For subjects that have
been extensively researched previously, judges will look how far these researches have
been successfully used in the exhibit to gauge knowledge and not penalize for lack of
opportunity for personal research. The exhibit should be given additional consideration if the
exhibitor has managed to come up with new findings in heavily studied area. New
discoveries should be given full coverage in accordance with their importance. Major
discoveries deserve important coverage and recognition and should be identified by the
exhibitor, while minor discoveries should not overpower the main exhibit.

4.12 The criteria of "Condition and Rarity" require an evaluation of the quality of the
displayed material considering the standard of the material that exists for the chosen subject,
the rarity and the relative difficulty of acquisition of the selected material. The jury should
take account of any really exceptionally fine or rare items present. Exhibitors are encouraged
to show unique or nearly unique material that does not occur in fine condition, but are
cautioned from including other items of a condition that may disfigure the exhibit. An
exhibitor may direct attention to special items with in the exhibit with a statement of the
reasons for its scarcity. However no statement of the value are permitted.

4.13 The criterion of "Presentation" requires an evaluation of the overall aesthetic

appearance of the exhibit. The presentation of an exhibit should be well finished and give a
good general impression. The exhibitors should conform to display the selected material
harmoniously, avoid too empty or overcharged sheets where the items overlap, and write the
accompanying texts precisely and in a legible, faultless writing. The method of presentation
should show the material to the best effect and in a balanced way. It should complement the
treatment of the exhibit by its general layout and clarity. Judges should evaluate how the
presentation enhances the understanding and attractiveness of the exhibit to judges and
viewers alike. Actual arrangement of the exhibit is a matter of personal taste and the choice
of one of the many accepted forms of presenting the material is left to the exhibitor.
Inventiveness is encouraged as long as good taste is observed, since a sameness of
appearance, regardless of how nicely executed, would be boring to the viewer.

4.14 No advantage or disadvantage shall apply as to whether the text is handwritten,

typewritten or printed. Brightly colored inks and colored album pages should be avoided.

4.15 The use of a marks system, together with appropriate evaluation sheets, can be helpful
in reaching balanced and rational evaluations. However, such a system cannot be applied
mechanically; the final marks totals also must be looked at in terms of the overall quality of
the exhibits. The detailed in this ’Criteria for Evaluation’ are meant to suggest the mental
process used in reaching a "numerical" evaluation. Jurors should look first for the positive
aspects of the exhibits, rather than merely looking to see "how many marks can I take off".

Article 5 Judging of Exhibits

5.1 Each jury group makes the final decision on the award of medals up to and including the
Silver Medal, provided other members of the jury offer no objection.

5.2 Proposals of the jury groups for all Gold Medals, as well as objections according to other
medals shall be submitted to the full jury for deliberation.

5.3 Decisions of the full jury are carried by highest number of votes. In the event of a tie, the
vote of the Jury President is decisive.

5.4 In all Classes except the Championship Class, there shall be three medal levels namely
Gold, Silver, and Bronze, to be awarded on the basis of the total of the assessments a
minimum of 90, 75, and 60 marks achieved. However, this (or any other) stipulation or IP-
PAS should not come in the way of the organizers adopting a simplified system of awards
pursuant to clause 7.16 of IP-PER, if such a need is felt.

5.6 The jury groups shall propose exhibits that exceed the requirements for a Gold Medal for
the award of Grand Prizes common to all classes. The entry that shall be adjudged the
overall best exhibit of the exhibition, excluding the Championship Class shall be awarded
(District/RegionaI/ZonaI/National) Grand Prize.

5.7 The entry that shall be adjudged the overall best exhibit in the youth class of the
exhibition shall be awarded (DistrictlRegionaIlZonaI/National) Youth Cup.

5.8 The entry that shall be adjudged the overall best exhibit in the School Collections Class
of the exhibition shall be awarded (DistrictlRegionaI/ZonaIlNational) Trophy.

5.9 The Jury may express Felicitations for exhibits distinguishing themselves by philatelic
research or originality.

5.10 The full Jury may award Special prizes proposed by the jury groups.

5.11 For the exhibits in all classes except Philatelic Publications and the Youth, the following
relative terms are presented to lead the Jury to balanced evaluation.
Treatment 35
Knowledge, Personal Study and Research 30
Condition and Rarity 30
Presentation 5
Total 100

5.12 The relative terms for Philatelic Publications and the Youth classes are given in their
respective guidelines.

5.13 The jury is not obliged to make an award of the same level that an exhibit received in
an earlier exhibition.

Article 6 Amendments
6.1 India Post reserves the right to amend these Regulations at any time.

Article 7 Authority
7.1 The decision of the Jury Chairperson shall be final on all matters related to the working
and decisions of the Jury.

7.2 For those cases where there is no ruling provided by these Rules the Jury
Chairperson will take a decision.

7.3 The Jury Chairperson is responsible for ruling on interpretation of these regulations, at
the exhibition.

7.4 The Chief of Philately Division of India Post [(DDG(Philately)] shall have the final
decision in cases of dispute.

7.5 In the event of any discrepancies in the text arising from translation, the English text shall
prevail.

Article 8 Application
8.1 These Rules will replace any other rules that have been previously promulgated.

8.2 These rules came into force on 15t August 2003.